1 INFO-VAX	Sun, 14 Dec 2003	Volume 2003 : Issue 691       Contents:' Re: <CR><LF> Not in FTP Transfered File ' RE: <CR><LF> Not in FTP Transfered File E Re: AXPVMS VMS731_UPDATE V2.0 glitch? (PRODUCT INSTALL vs. privilege) E Re: AXPVMS VMS731_UPDATE V2.0 glitch? (PRODUCT INSTALL vs. privilege)  Re: DETRX-M Manual anywhere?# Re: Disks for a MicroVAX II system.  Re: Full or Partial file spec ?  Re: Full or Partial file spec ?  Re: Full or Partial file spec ?  Re: GV on OpenVMS v7.3-1?  RE: GV on OpenVMS v7.3-1?  Re: GV on OpenVMS v7.3-1?  Help& Move from TCPIP Services to Multinet ?* Re: Move from TCPIP Services to Multinet ?* Re: Move from TCPIP Services to Multinet ?* Re: Move from TCPIP Services to Multinet ?* Re: Move from TCPIP Services to Multinet ? Re: OpenVMS org  Re: OpenVMS VAX 6.1 CDs wanted3 Re: OpenVMS, CSWS (apache), PHP and ... Rdb ???!!!!  Re: OT: Digital Divide Problems with 7.3 and 164LX  RE: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX  Re: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX  RE: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX  Re: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX  Re: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX  Re: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX  question on SMTP queues  RE: question on SMTP queues  Re: question on SMTP queues ( Re: Singapore Exchange to run on OpenVMS Re: TCPIP 5.3 VAX on Hobbyist  Re: TCPIP 5.3 VAX on Hobbyist  Re: TCPIP 5.3 VAX on Hobbyist  Re: TCPIP 5.3 VAX on Hobbyist  Re: TCPIP 5.3 VAX on Hobbyist  Re: Turbochannel SCSI   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 14 Dec 2003 01:48:26 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 0 Subject: Re: <CR><LF> Not in FTP Transfered File3 Message-ID: <MrkXZqyN3qXq@eisner.encompasserve.org>   S In article <vtnk1fkam2vb4d@corp.supernews.com>, Z  <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> writes: 0 > Larry Kilgallen <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote:E > : Or to use built-in VMS tools, transfer files as a backup save set D > : and then manually set the characteristics of the save set on theE > : target system.  There are SET FILE/ATTRIBUTE ways to do this, but  > : I still prefer:  > 9 > FTPing a saveset?  Good luck when you try to unpack it.   $ Not luck, use the commands I posted.   > Easier to use ZIP.  I That fails utterly if you do not have it on one of the machines involved. = Backup is on every VMS version released in the past 20 years.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 06:10:42 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> 0 Subject: RE: <CR><LF> Not in FTP Transfered File9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIMEJKIKAA.tom@kednos.com>    >-----Original Message----- ( >From: Z [mailto:zarlenga@conan.ids.net]* >Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 6:51 PM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com1 >Subject: Re: <CR><LF> Not in FTP Transfered File  >  > # >Tom Linden <tom@kednos.com> wrote: & >: Zip it and transfer in binary mode. > ; >And make sure you do NOT use "-V" (if you zip on VMS) when  >you zip them up.   = Why not?  I always use ZIP/VMS, no problem unzipping on other A platforms, such W2K or Unix.   But Larry's commands are certainly & more universal amongst VMS platforms.   > Actually, I think ZIP should be shipped with VMS.  Backporting should be almost automatic.      --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:32:26 +0100 * From: Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net>N Subject: Re: AXPVMS VMS731_UPDATE V2.0 glitch? (PRODUCT INSTALL vs. privilege)0 Message-ID: <3FDC2019.3B0DBD9F@sture.homeip.net>   Larry Kilgallen wrote: > _ > In article <3FDB5BFA.76080132@sture.homeip.net>, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net> writes:  > > Wayne Sewell wrote:  > 0 > >> >From: Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net> > N > >> >LOG_IO privilege is required to run WRITEBOOT, and the installation does > >> >not turn it on.  > >> >M > >> >-----------------------------------------------------------------------  > >> >" > >> >Execution phase starting ... > >> >= > >> >The following product will be installed to destination: L > >> >    DEC AXPVMS VMS731_UPDATE V2.0          DISK$ALPHASYS:[VMS$COMMON.] > >> >L > >> >Portion done: 0%...10%...20%...30%...40%...50%...60%...70%...80%...90%  > >> >You lack LOG_IO privilege. > K > >> >This of course begs the question of whether turning all privileges on K > >> >should be routine when performing PRODUCT INSTALL. I don't think I've $ > >> >ever needed to do that before. > M > My understanding has always been that unlike VMSINSTAL.COM, PRODUCT INSTALL D > enables no privileges.  There are security reasons for saying thatI > privilege should not be enabled behind the back of the user by software I > that is trustworthy.  (And of course, there is no "should" for software  > that is not trustworthy.)  >   G OK, though I would have preferred it to tell me I was lacking privilege  somewhere at the beginning.   M > >> >(In case anyone wonders why I didn't use the SYSTEM account, working in I > >> >an environment with multiple system managers, we have developed the E > >> >practice of using our own accounts for installations, for audit  > >> >purposes.) > G > That is a good security practice, but it appears you have fallen into G > a trap of presuming that your current privileges are adequate.  Since H > my default is to run with NETMBX, TMPMBX, SETPRV and OPER, I am in the9 > habit of setting all privileges before PRODUCT INSTALL.   E You are correct. I have an innate dislike of enabling all privileges, 7 but tend to run with more than the minimum you suggest.    --  
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Dec 2003 07:03:19 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) N Subject: Re: AXPVMS VMS731_UPDATE V2.0 glitch? (PRODUCT INSTALL vs. privilege)3 Message-ID: <rYn3YlCZpGLJ@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ] In article <3FDC2019.3B0DBD9F@sture.homeip.net>, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net> writes:  > Larry Kilgallen wrote:  N >> My understanding has always been that unlike VMSINSTAL.COM, PRODUCT INSTALLE >> enables no privileges.  There are security reasons for saying that J >> privilege should not be enabled behind the back of the user by softwareJ >> that is trustworthy.  (And of course, there is no "should" for software >> that is not trustworthy.) >>   > I > OK, though I would have preferred it to tell me I was lacking privilege  > somewhere at the beginning.   E The PRODUCT INSTALL definition language has no syntax to specify what F privileges are required for a particular kit (and WRITEBOOT is not theH normal sort of program to be run within an EXECUTE procedure.  CertainlyJ a particular kit could make an early check, but those who avoid the SYSTEMH account to achieve accountability should be using an environment that is! equivalent to the SYSTEM account.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 16:45:24 +0100 ( From: "H Vlems" <hvlems.nieuw@zonnet.nl>% Subject: Re: DETRX-M Manual anywhere? 9 Message-ID: <bri0oo$3hedm$1@ID-143435.news.uni-berlin.de>   A "Wilm Boerhout" <w.boerhoutOLD@PAINTplanet.nl> schreef in bericht $ news:brfcuq$q7s$1@reader10.wxs.nl...	 > Thanks!  > J > Are the two RJ45 connectors on the DETRX useable for connecting the unit= > to a regular hub, replacing the thinwire connection on top?  >  > Wilm >  > H Vlems wrote: > E > > Wilm, from memory: the frames can be connected and managed as one  entity. K > > They behave as one DEChub 90 for instance. The RJ45 connectors are used  toJ > > daisy chain the frames and the rotary switch gives each unit a number,K > > similar to the slot position of the hub90. Two prositions are reserverd  for ) > > a DECbridge90 and / or a DECagent 90. K > > I cannot remember of the short RJ45 cables were straight or not. If you  haveG > > a single unit you can ignore them all, including the setting of the  rotary > > switch.  > >  > Wilm Boerhout  >  > w.boerhoutOLD@PAINTplanet.nl* >    (remove OLD PAINT from reply address) > I Nee Wilm, de RJ45 connectoren zijn alleen om de standalone stacks door te + lussen. Het zijn geen ethernet connectoren!   3 (PS in mijn email adres moet je .nieuw weghalen :-)    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 18:46:37 +0100 ( From: "H Vlems" <hvlems.nieuw@zonnet.nl>, Subject: Re: Disks for a MicroVAX II system.9 Message-ID: <bri7s2$3n4sd$1@ID-143435.news.uni-berlin.de>   9 "Paul Sture" <nospam@sture.homeip.net> schreef in bericht * news:3FDADD04.55C002B6@sture.homeip.net... > Michael Moroney wrote: > > 5 > > Chris Scheers <chris@applied-synergy.com> writes:  > > @ > > >The RD54 is actually a pretty reliable drive.  Why are they > > >questionable? > > J > > Really?  I've heard many, many RD54s sing and squeal before (or after) > > they commit suicide. > % > Click burr. Click burr. Click burr.  > ) > Switch off to cool for an hour or more.  > Switch on and take backups. 
 > Replace. >  > --   > Paul Sture  I Terrific: symptoms, diagnose and treatment in 4 lines :-), and absolutely " correct (don't ask me how I know).   ------------------------------    Date: 13 Dec 2003 22:48:59 -0800. From: spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman)( Subject: Re: Full or Partial file spec ?= Message-ID: <b096a4ee.0312132248.65387617@posting.google.com>   [ JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message news:<3FDB8CA8.F3CA9771@istop.com>...  > "Alan E. Feldman" wrote:I > > Take the user's input and run it through $SEARCH twice. (I'm assuming % > > it works the same as F$SEARCH().)  > K > Image start up for X applications is slow enough as it is. The X software M > looks through a gazillion directories for various config files whenever you K > start an image. I don't want to make matters worse by searching through a P > directory (or directories) just for the sake of finding out if there is a * or > % in a string. > N > If SYS$PARSE cannot tell me if a file spec contains wildcards or not, then IF > am not going to insert a big loop and have RMS allocate all sorts ofM > structures behind the scenes. Perhaps if I worked for Microsoft, I would be > > encouraged to add as much overhead as possible to a program.  E You didn't say it was an X app. And if X apps look thru gazillions of B directories, what's one more directory? So it takes 1.001x seconds* instead of x seconds. What's the big deal?  / You also asked for the easiest way in your OP.    4 What is the nature of your "file selection dialog"?   F If there is no wildcard, don't you have to search for the file anyway?  B If there is a wildcard, don't you need to create a list of choices anyway?    Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldman    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 02:08:49 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>( Subject: Re: Full or Partial file spec ?) Message-ID: <3FDC0C5B.6AC5126C@istop.com>    "Alan E. Feldman" wrote:5 > What is the nature of your "file selection dialog"?   J It is the standard vanilla decwindows file selection dialog. You give it aI title, a file pattern to match. And then it returns the full file name as L selected by the user. For instance, right now, I give it "SYS$LIBRARY:*.TLB"G and that presents a list of .TLBs in SYS$LIBRARY, but the user can then C navigate, change the file extention and the dialog may return to me $ sys$HELP:HELPLIB.HLB;2 for instance.  H > If there is no wildcard, don't you have to search for the file anyway?  K Nop. If there is no wildcard, I just go ahead and process the file (it is a 8 library file, so I use the LBR$ routines to process it).  D > If there is a wildcard, don't you need to create a list of choices	 > anyway?   K Nop. The xwindows file selection dialog does that for me behind the scenes.    ------------------------------  + Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 16:07:44 +0000 (UTC) ? From: Graham Burley <burley.not-this@encompasserve-or-this.org> ( Subject: Re: Full or Partial file spec ?9 Message-ID: <3FDC8A3B.73389D96@encompasserve-or-this.org>    JF Mezei wrote:  > N > However, looking at the documentation for SYS$PARSE, it is not obvious to meF > how I can find out if the string is a wildcard specification or not.  F You need to provide a NAM block, then after the $PARSE check NAM$L_FNB to see if NAM$V_WILCARD is set.      > L > Also of concern to me is the fact that, according the the doc,  SYS$PARSE,H > upon encountering a wildcard specification will automatically allocateM > internal structures that will be used by subsequent SYS$SEARCH, and I don't J > need any of that. It isn't mentioned whether the SYS$PARSE equivalent of@ > SYNTAX_ONLY bypasses all that preparatory work for SYS$SEARCH.   The $PARSE docs say:  ?  "To release this space, use a Parse service that specifies the @   NAM$B_NOP field NAM$V_SYNCHK option and sets the FAB$B_DNS and   NAM$L_RLF fields to zero."     Graham   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 09:54:56 -0600 5 From: "Martin P.J. Zinser" <zinser@zinser.no-ip.info> " Subject: Re: GV on OpenVMS v7.3-1?9 Message-ID: <bri14m$3g46n$1@ID-209632.news.uni-berlin.de>    Richard L. Dyson wrote: H > Has anyone tried to recompile GV on current systems and compilers?  I 	 > started I > to try on my VMS v7.3-1 with C v6.5-001 but have encountered errors and 4 > was hoping someone else has already updated it. :) >  > Rick   Hello Rick,   
 the kits from   ) http://zinser.no-ip.info/vms/sw/xaw.htmlx ( http://zinser.no-ip.info/vms/sw/gv.htmlx  F do compile clean under OpenVMS Alpha 7.3-1, CC 6.5, Motif 1.3. You do ; need to get the local copies, not the originals from Mainz.    Greetings, Martin    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:07:07 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> " Subject: RE: GV on OpenVMS v7.3-1?9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIGEJOIKAA.tom@kednos.com>   - Martin, does that include the PS2PDF utility?    >-----Original Message----- ; >From: Martin P.J. Zinser [mailto:zinser@zinser.no-ip.info] ( >Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 7:55 AM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com# >Subject: Re: GV on OpenVMS v7.3-1?  >  >  >Richard L. Dyson wrote:I >> Has anyone tried to recompile GV on current systems and compilers?  I  
 >> startedJ >> to try on my VMS v7.3-1 with C v6.5-001 but have encountered errors and5 >> was hoping someone else has already updated it. :)  >>   >> Rick  >  >Hello Rick, >  >the kits from > * >http://zinser.no-ip.info/vms/sw/xaw.htmlx) >http://zinser.no-ip.info/vms/sw/gv.htmlx  > G >do compile clean under OpenVMS Alpha 7.3-1, CC 6.5, Motif 1.3. You do  < >need to get the local copies, not the originals from Mainz. >  >Greetings, Martin >  >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. ; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). A >Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003  >  --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 11:07:19 -0600 5 From: "Martin P.J. Zinser" <zinser@zinser.no-ip.info> " Subject: Re: GV on OpenVMS v7.3-1?9 Message-ID: <bri5c7$3k6q2$1@ID-209632.news.uni-berlin.de>    Tom Linden wrote: / > Martin, does that include the PS2PDF utility?  > 
 Hello Tom,  F no ps2pdf is part of Ghostscript, not Ghostview. I am currently tydingD up documentation on Xaw3d/Xmu, then need to brush up on some of the G dependant applications and after that hope to look into GS. OTOH there  ; should be a port on the Freeware 6.0 if you are interested.    Greetings, Martin    >> >>Richard L. Dyson wrote:  >>I >>>Has anyone tried to recompile GV on current systems and compilers?  I  
 >>>startedJ >>>to try on my VMS v7.3-1 with C v6.5-001 but have encountered errors and5 >>>was hoping someone else has already updated it. :)  >>>  >>>Rick  >>
 >>Hello Rick,  >> >>the kits from  >>+ >>http://zinser.no-ip.info/vms/sw/xaw.htmlx * >>http://zinser.no-ip.info/vms/sw/gv.htmlx >>H >>do compile clean under OpenVMS Alpha 7.3-1, CC 6.5, Motif 1.3. You do = >>need to get the local copies, not the originals from Mainz.  >> >>Greetings, Martin    ------------------------------  $ Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 14:08:08 +0100* From: "Adainen" <mario.adanic@kr.htnet.hr>
 Subject: Help ) Message-ID: <brhn9f$4b9$1@ls219.htnet.hr>   I     Can someone tell me how can I make two copies of output job logs. The K thing shud be programmedin JCL job header so I can later scan this logs for 8 some interesting information (zOS 390 with SAS programs) Thanks in advance!   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 06:20:37 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>/ Subject: Move from TCPIP Services to Multinet ? ) Message-ID: <3FDC474D.68E6656A@istop.com>    Paul Sture wrote: # > You can register as a Hobbyist at . > http://www.process.com/openvms/hobbyist.html  L Has anyone converted from TCPIP Services 5.3 to Multinet ? Would one have toJ relink all home-grown TCPIP applications or will those run transparently ?  I Is there anything TCPIP Services has that Multinet doesn't have ? (not so B concerned about performance on large systems, more concerned about availabillity of tools).  I Generally speaking, is there any outlook on what will happen to VMS TCPIP K stacks ?  TCPIP Services still needs a lot of work. Is there anyone left in H the TCPIP Services group ? Or has the product lost its famous Gold coast& surfer, and new england pool lounger ?  I has a hobbyist, I wonder if it is worth converting from TCPIP Services to M Multinet. I'd gain a functional PPP interface. TCPIP Services 5.3 crashes the J whole system with SLIP lines, and 5.0 doesn't honour hardware flow controlN with SLIP lines. IMAP is broken since ECO-2 etc. It is pathetic that I have toL connect my PDA via my ISP's dialup lines because I can't connect it directly' via serial lines I have on my machines.     I Will 3rd party stacks such as Multinet survive ? Or will HP structure the M licencing of VMS such that all VMS sites will have TCPIP Services and Process  will abandon Multinet ?    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 13:13:41 GMT 4 From: brad@.gateway.2wire.net (Bradford J. Hamilton)3 Subject: Re: Move from TCPIP Services to Multinet ? 0 Message-ID: <9mZCb.388441$275.1243914@attbi_s53>  V In article <3FDC474D.68E6656A@istop.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> writes: !Paul Sture wrote:$ !> You can register as a Hobbyist at/ !> http://www.process.com/openvms/hobbyist.html  ! M !Has anyone converted from TCPIP Services 5.3 to Multinet ? Would one have to K !relink all home-grown TCPIP applications or will those run transparently ?  ! J !Is there anything TCPIP Services has that Multinet doesn't have ? (not soC !concerned about performance on large systems, more concerned about  !availabillity of tools).  ! J !Generally speaking, is there any outlook on what will happen to VMS TCPIPL !stacks ?  TCPIP Services still needs a lot of work. Is there anyone left inI !the TCPIP Services group ? Or has the product lost its famous Gold coast ' !surfer, and new england pool lounger ?  ! J !has a hobbyist, I wonder if it is worth converting from TCPIP Services toN !Multinet. I'd gain a functional PPP interface. TCPIP Services 5.3 crashes theK !whole system with SLIP lines, and 5.0 doesn't honour hardware flow control O !with SLIP lines. IMAP is broken since ECO-2 etc. It is pathetic that I have to M !connect my PDA via my ISP's dialup lines because I can't connect it directly ( !via serial lines I have on my machines. !   A I'm not sure, but I assume your questions are not rhetorical.	:-)   M I don't have any home-grown applications, but conversion from TCP/IP Services A (V5.0A) to TCPware was simple.  You already know (I assume) that  O TCPware/Multinet have more functionality "out-of-the-box" than TCP/IP Services  4 V5.3, and support a wider range of VMS O/S versions.  J I'm speaking here strictly as a hobbyist of course, so I can't address theO question of price/performance, but if I were a commercial user - and money was  M not an issue - TCPware/Multinet would be my "stack(s) of choice" at work, as   well as at home.   ! J !Will 3rd party stacks such as Multinet survive ? Or will HP structure theN !licencing of VMS such that all VMS sites will have TCPIP Services and Process !will abandon Multinet ?  J __________________________________________________________________________A Bradford J. Hamilton                    "All opinions are my own" K bMradAhamiPltSon-at-coMmcAast.nPeSt     "Lose the MAPS, and replace '-at-'  0                                          with @"   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 13:51:54 GMT 6 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)3 Subject: Re: Move from TCPIP Services to Multinet ? 2 Message-ID: <_VZCb.61959$dt3.43562@news.chello.at>  V In article <3FDC474D.68E6656A@istop.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> writes: >Paul Sture wrote:$ >> You can register as a Hobbyist at/ >> http://www.process.com/openvms/hobbyist.html  > M >Has anyone converted from TCPIP Services 5.3 to Multinet ? Would one have to K >relink all home-grown TCPIP applications or will those run transparently ?   N AFAIK, no. The UCX compatibility mode of TCPware and Multinet is "good enough"M And I'd recommend TCPware of course, but the difference is getting smaller...   J >Is there anything TCPIP Services has that Multinet doesn't have ? (not soC >concerned about performance on large systems, more concerned about  >availabillity of tools).   . For a short time, it was agent-x, means eSNMP.K But AFAIK, TCPware has caught this advantage of TCPIP some months/years ago O (and I bet, Multinet, too) while keeping it's own (still dwindling) advantages.   J >Generally speaking, is there any outlook on what will happen to VMS TCPIPL >stacks ?  TCPIP Services still needs a lot of work. Is there anyone left inI >the TCPIP Services group ? Or has the product lost its famous Gold coast ' >surfer, and new england pool lounger ?   I I think, they are well on their way. I do not fear for TCP/IP engineering # more than I fear for whole OpenVMS.   K But I must admit, that the advantage of having a common source-pool between K OpenVMS and Tru64 disappears with Tru64, and then what is left is a ported, I not perfectly (but good enough) integrated (with OpenVMS) IP stack and so ) TCPware might look then way better again.   J >has a hobbyist, I wonder if it is worth converting from TCPIP Services toN >Multinet. I'd gain a functional PPP interface. TCPIP Services 5.3 crashes theK >whole system with SLIP lines, and 5.0 doesn't honour hardware flow control  >with SLIP lines.   $ Do you still miss an Alpha at home ?@ I have 2x DEC3000-600 and 1x AlphaStation 200 in my basement ;-)  1 >                 IMAP is broken since ECO-2 etc.   D IMAP is also available as a freeware (with PINE) as you surely know.G And IMAP in TCPware hasn't got big improvements over the years, either.   O >                                                 It is pathetic that I have to M >connect my PDA via my ISP's dialup lines because I can't connect it directly ( >via serial lines I have on my machines.  A You could also use a DECserver (as you surely know) for SLIP/PPP.   J >Will 3rd party stacks such as Multinet survive ? Or will HP structure theN >licencing of VMS such that all VMS sites will have TCPIP Services and Process >will abandon Multinet ?  K Who knows ? And who knows if VMS will survive the death of Itanic ? And who  knows if ITANIC will die ?   --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Dec 2003 07:45:04 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)3 Subject: Re: Move from TCPIP Services to Multinet ? = Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0312140745.7e5a8bc8@posting.google.com>   [ JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message news:<3FDC474D.68E6656A@istop.com>...  > Paul Sture wrote: % > > You can register as a Hobbyist at 0 > > http://www.process.com/openvms/hobbyist.html > N > Has anyone converted from TCPIP Services 5.3 to Multinet ? Would one have toL > relink all home-grown TCPIP applications or will those run transparently ? > K > Is there anything TCPIP Services has that Multinet doesn't have ? (not so D > concerned about performance on large systems, more concerned about > availabillity of tools). > K > Generally speaking, is there any outlook on what will happen to VMS TCPIP M > stacks ?  TCPIP Services still needs a lot of work. Is there anyone left in J > the TCPIP Services group ? Or has the product lost its famous Gold coast( > surfer, and new england pool lounger ? > K > has a hobbyist, I wonder if it is worth converting from TCPIP Services to O > Multinet. I'd gain a functional PPP interface. TCPIP Services 5.3 crashes the L > whole system with SLIP lines, and 5.0 doesn't honour hardware flow controlP > with SLIP lines. IMAP is broken since ECO-2 etc. It is pathetic that I have toN > connect my PDA via my ISP's dialup lines because I can't connect it directly) > via serial lines I have on my machines.  >  > K > Will 3rd party stacks such as Multinet survive ? Or will HP structure the O > licencing of VMS such that all VMS sites will have TCPIP Services and Process  > will abandon Multinet ?   @ we went from ucx to TCPware because in head to head testing with@ our web site, TCPware beat multinet and ucx for performance, andA TCPware as all the same functionality as multinet, but TCPware is B based on the vms kernel ... with all the problems and shortcomingsB ucx has (thanks to Dave Palmer) I don't think you will see Process? products going anywhere ... if HP was smart they would just buy A TCPware from Process and put this superior VMS kernel based stack @ on VMS and forget spending a lot of developement costs to try to* undo the damage Dave Palmer did to ucx ...   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Dec 2003 09:12:59 -0800. From: fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br (Fabio Cardoso)3 Subject: Re: Move from TCPIP Services to Multinet ? = Message-ID: <f30679fb.0312140912.3c1877d4@posting.google.com>   [ JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message news:<3FDC474D.68E6656A@istop.com>...  > Paul Sture wrote: % > > You can register as a Hobbyist at 0 > > http://www.process.com/openvms/hobbyist.html > N > Has anyone converted from TCPIP Services 5.3 to Multinet ? Would one have toL > relink all home-grown TCPIP applications or will those run transparently ? > K > Is there anything TCPIP Services has that Multinet doesn't have ? (not so D > concerned about performance on large systems, more concerned about > availabillity of tools). > K > Generally speaking, is there any outlook on what will happen to VMS TCPIP M > stacks ?  TCPIP Services still needs a lot of work. Is there anyone left in J > the TCPIP Services group ? Or has the product lost its famous Gold coast( > surfer, and new england pool lounger ? > K > has a hobbyist, I wonder if it is worth converting from TCPIP Services to O > Multinet. I'd gain a functional PPP interface. TCPIP Services 5.3 crashes the L > whole system with SLIP lines, and 5.0 doesn't honour hardware flow controlP > with SLIP lines. IMAP is broken since ECO-2 etc. It is pathetic that I have toN > connect my PDA via my ISP's dialup lines because I can't connect it directly) > via serial lines I have on my machines.  >  > K > Will 3rd party stacks such as Multinet survive ? Or will HP structure the O > licencing of VMS such that all VMS sites will have TCPIP Services and Process  > will abandon Multinet ?    Mezei   4 Don't worry ! Itanium servers have Lan Consoles  :-)3 You can connect your PDA by a Lan Connection to the ; console ! In the HP PA-RISCs there were a serial connection  to in the lan management card.    ? May be this card can be used in old Alphas too in the future ?     Regards    FC   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:03:14 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>  Subject: Re: OpenVMS orgK Message-ID: <SY_Cb.16775$%TO.15281@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>    Paul Repacholi wrote: ' > "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes:  > F >> I do not believe it is all that important to advertise VMS, per se.F >> After all, how many ads do you see promoting OS390.  The real issueE >> is the marketing focus of HP.  The key is to promote solutions and E >> understand how to translate in to a product matrix.  And, Itanium, G >> alpha are NOT products, they are the delivery platforms for the real B >> products which are the OS's and the applications adminstered by >> them. > G > A minumum of 1, probably 2 or 3, and that is just in Tues Australian!  > G > IBM has no problem advertzing and pressenting a unified images across E > z, i, p, e and the thing systems. I wonder if they give lessions...     I That's because IBM is a function company, as opposed to the dysfunctional " mess at HP corporate headquarters.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 16:53:24 +0100 ( From: "H Vlems" <hvlems.nieuw@zonnet.nl>' Subject: Re: OpenVMS VAX 6.1 CDs wanted 9 Message-ID: <bri17o$3dpuv$1@ID-143435.news.uni-berlin.de>    Original or copy?   * "msell" <msell@pdq.net> schreef in bericht' news:brdu6o$npp@library1.airnews.net...  >  > Hello, >  >  > D > Does anyone here have a spare set of OpenVMS VAX 6.1 CDs for sale? > ( > Please respond with your asking price. > G > Yes - I know about EBay. My original set came from EBay, but 6.1 sets " > don't show up too often anymore. >  > Much appreciated! Thanks!  >  >  >  >  > --   >  > -------------------------  > Matthew Sell > Programmer > UNIX System Administrator  > On Time Support, Inc.  > www.ontimesupport.com  > 6 > Join the Metrology Software Discussion List METLIST!+ > http://www.ontimesupport.com/metlist.html  >  > 3 > Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional. B > Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground. >    ------------------------------    Date: 14 Dec 2003 10:09:24 -0800. From: dieter.rossbach@gmx.de (Dieter  Ro?bach)< Subject: Re: OpenVMS, CSWS (apache), PHP and ... Rdb ???!!!!= Message-ID: <e1d40caf.0312141009.63dc3465@posting.google.com>   z Jack Patteeuw <jjpatteeuw@earthlink.nospamme> wrote in message news:<FKHCb.147$sW5.25@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>...H > I was extactic to just recently find out that CSWS V1.2 came with PHP  > and MySQL! > J > What I really want to know, is any one working on PHP for Rdb !  Oracle J > amnounced support for PHP in their "other" product line back in Aug '03. >  > jp  E You need Attunity Connect to connect php via ODBC to Rdb. You have to A set up sqlsrv as well. I did some tests with this environment, it F runs, but finally went to JSP and JDBC as the Attunity Connect is much too expensive (for me).    Regards     Dieter Rossbach    dieter.rossbach at gmx dot de    ------------------------------    Date: 14 Dec 2003 07:10:45 -0800. From: fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br (Fabio Cardoso) Subject: Re: OT: Digital Divide = Message-ID: <f30679fb.0312140710.3d72e75e@posting.google.com>   u "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message news:<u0NCb.12888$%TO.3791@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>...  > Fabio Cardoso wrote:9 > > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message ) > > news:<3FDADB70.8EA7928C@istop.com>... F > >> BBC aired an interesting forum with participants of the recent UNG > >> World Summit on Information society held this past week in Geneva.  > >>I > >> Right now, only 10% of the world's population has access to IT.  And F > >> while in the USA, the cost of a PC represents somwhere near 2% ofG > >> average income, it represents a huge proportion of income in other C > >> countries, while in other countries, the average citizen can't  > >> afford a computer.  > >>F > >> As a result, if companies such as HP (who had a representative inC > >> that forum) want to expand their market to 100% of the world's I > >> population, they will have to start to produce significantly cheaper H > >> devices, otherwise they risk stagnating once market penetration hasG > >> stoped rising in developped nations.(Or see itself replaced with a B > >> low cost asian manufacturer (as has happened with Television, > >> telephones etc).  > >>> > >> Also brewing is the possibility of the UN taking over theE > >> responsability of the internet so that it  would be regulated by A > >> international law instead of some local law. Consider domain>E > >> management, as well as various laws such as anti-spam laws which B > >> would be easier to coordinate if it originated from a central > >> international body. > >>F > >> So ICANN might become a UN body such as ICAO (civil aviation). ItI > >> isn't there. They are just talking about the possibility of strikinguF > >> a committee which would spawn a task force to study the issue :-) > >> :-) :-) > >o > > We are doing our job ! > >o > >I+ > > "Brazil champions free Internet access"  > >c5 > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/34358.htmln > > C > > But we dont develop hardware. We have a good software industry.c@ > > It's time to rethink the PC.  If I wanted to buy a new PC in9 > > Brazil I will pay for several months with high taxes. C > > May be an alternative platform, like the idea of NetPC's etc....G > > I tought in Amiga (they're freezed), but they have a cheap computer C > > which can use an internet browser, run small programs, and it's6 > > enough.bE > > The great population dont need workstations at home. They need toPG > > type a text, make some calculs (even don't need a spreadsheet), useO5 > > the browser for Internet Banking - I use  a lot !A > >H5 > > The great jump for me will be the Open Processor.  > >nD > > May be the in development countries like Brazil, India and China? > > can join efforts to develop an Open Architecture Processor.- >  > N > Why don't they just start by using a proven design......Alpha? If HP doesn'tM > want it and doesn't think it can 'keep up', then 'donate' it to the Chinesei. > or India. I'm sure they can make a go of it. > L > Billions and billions served. And it wouldn't come out of HP's hide - onlyH > Intel's. You see, Intel & HP are both certain that the 64-bit industryI > standard is Itanic, so the fact that the Chinese and Indians could havec' > Alpha shouldn't bother them one iota.e    5 I have my doubts about Intel donating Alpha for free! 9 Intel's President said in a Brazilian Conference that my o: country dont need a semiconductor industry, just software.; It was because AMD and Intel were disputing factories here.hA Now we dont have none of them ! Nice ok ? He must be an angel....r  8 In terms of Open Processor, I think SPARC group could doC something because SPARC is a group, not an industry, like HP/Intel.e  F At the end, Opteron, Itanium, PPC and SPARC do the same thing: MOV A,B: For me there is no diference between processors anymore ! A IT Industry is too worried about the tools (chips), not about thee good use of the tools.   Regards0   FC   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:39:12 +0100r& From: Tor Arne Rein <tarein@online.no>$ Subject: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX1 Message-ID: <fE_Cb.6022$Y06.97730@news4.e.nsc.no>    Hi,f  F I'm a completely VMS newbie (although I've managed to install OpenVMS G 7.3 VAX on the SIMH VAX emulator).  I have problems installing OpenVMS rI 7.3-1 (Hobbyist) on the "unsupported" AlphaPC 164LX based box. I've read uF through this news group and the OpenVMS FAQ, and have found tips from 4 other people having problems with the same hardware.   This is what I have tried:  J 1. Boot directly from CD. Fails with a crash (?) right after this message:  8     Open VMS (TM) Alpha Operating System, Version V7.3-1  H **** Open VMS (TM) Alpha Operating System, Version V7.3-1 - BUGCHECK****; ** Bugcheck code = 0000036C:PROCGONE, Process not in system?7 ** Crash CPU: 00  Primary CPU: 00  Active CPUs: 0000001B ** Current Process = SYSINIT  3 **** Error log buffers not dumped to SYS$ERRLOG.DMP31 **** Canceled memory dump, no dump file availablep       SYSTEM SHUTDOWN COMPLETE   halted CPU 0  G 2. Booted with floppy images as the hint's from the FAQ for Multia and iC aixppcia33, I tried both the multia and aixppci33 floppy images. I nH pressed Y a couple of times when asked if the DVA0 device is ready, And I there was activity on the floppy, but after a while, just the same crash  	 as above.o    D But after what I have read on this group, there are people who have G reported success installing OpenVMS 7.2 instead. Could some one verify t this ?  F So my question is really if there is a way for me to get a version of G OpenVMS 7.2 to try ? On the hoppyist orderpage, it seems there is only  # possible to order OpenVMS 7.3 cd's.u  E (BTW: the machine is running Tru64 perfectly, so I dont think it's a >H hardware bug. It's fitted with a SCSI controller from QLogic (1040) and F a Permedia2 based VGA card. I've also tried with a NCR 810 based SCSI  controller)y   Tor Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 07:02:20 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> ( Subject: RE: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIOEJLIKAA.tom@kednos.com>w   Have you updated the firmware?   >-----Original Message-----h. >From: Tor Arne Rein [mailto:tarein@online.no]( >Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 6:39 AM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com% >Subject: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX  >h >  >Hi, > G >I'm a completely VMS newbie (although I've managed to install OpenVMS iH >7.3 VAX on the SIMH VAX emulator).  I have problems installing OpenVMS J >7.3-1 (Hobbyist) on the "unsupported" AlphaPC 164LX based box. I've read G >through this news group and the OpenVMS FAQ, and have found tips from V5 >other people having problems with the same hardware.e >e >This is what I have tried:  > K >1. Boot directly from CD. Fails with a crash (?) right after this message:u >i9 >    Open VMS (TM) Alpha Operating System, Version V7.3-1  >-I >**** Open VMS (TM) Alpha Operating System, Version V7.3-1 - BUGCHECK****g< >** Bugcheck code = 0000036C:PROCGONE, Process not in system8 >** Crash CPU: 00  Primary CPU: 00  Active CPUs: 0000001 >** Current Process = SYSINITe >m4 >**** Error log buffers not dumped to SYS$ERRLOG.DMP2 >**** Canceled memory dump, no dump file available >s >    SYSTEM SHUTDOWN COMPLETE  >M
 >halted CPU 0  > H >2. Booted with floppy images as the hint's from the FAQ for Multia and D >aixppcia33, I tried both the multia and aixppci33 floppy images. I I >pressed Y a couple of times when asked if the DVA0 device is ready, And tJ >there was activity on the floppy, but after a while, just the same crash 
 >as above. >> > E >But after what I have read on this group, there are people who have vH >reported success installing OpenVMS 7.2 instead. Could some one verify  >this ?a >oG >So my question is really if there is a way for me to get a version of nH >OpenVMS 7.2 to try ? On the hoppyist orderpage, it seems there is only $ >possible to order OpenVMS 7.3 cd's. >cF >(BTW: the machine is running Tru64 perfectly, so I dont think it's a I >hardware bug. It's fitted with a SCSI controller from QLogic (1040) and hG >a Permedia2 based VGA card. I've also tried with a NCR 810 based SCSI   >controller) >0	 >Tor ArneH >e >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.X; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).eA >Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003> >h ---i& Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 16:27:58 +0100 & From: Tor Arne Rein <tarein@online.no>( Subject: Re: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX1 Message-ID: <_l%Cb.6032$Y06.97872@news4.e.nsc.no>e   Hi,o   Tom Linden wrote:o  > Have you updated the firmware?  D Yes, Tru64 came with a firmware CD, "show config" now reports: "SRM % Console 5.8-1" . Is that the latest ?e   Tor Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 07:59:53 -0800e# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>o( Subject: RE: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIMEJNIKAA.tom@kednos.com>   ) Well the one that came with 7.3-1 was 6.2o  E Now I believe that the 164LX was used in the Pelicans Dec 3000/300LX, D of which I have two, one with Tru64 4.0d and the other with VMS7.3-1F and I believe I have the same firmware in both, but can only check the unix box  " thor/tom 261 > /sbin/consvar -v -l Firmware Rev: 6.0- system fam:7  cpu:2  smm:10696  C I would try upgrading the firmware first to at least rule that out.s     >-----Original Message-----g. >From: Tor Arne Rein [mailto:tarein@online.no]( >Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 7:28 AM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com) >Subject: Re: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX  >h >  >Hi, >r >Tom Linden wrote:! >> Have you updated the firmware?m >rE >Yes, Tru64 came with a firmware CD, "show config" now reports: "SRM r& >Console 5.8-1" . Is that the latest ? >y	 >Tor Arner >a >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.); >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).cA >Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003o >n ---e& Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:36:03 -0600p( From: Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com>( Subject: Re: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX/ Message-ID: <00A2A5B6.895015F8.5@tachysoft.com>o  ' >From: Tor Arne Rein <tarein@online.no>o >X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms) >Subject: Re: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX ; >In-Reply-To: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIOEJLIKAA.tom@kednos.com>u >$ >Hi, >i >Tom Linden wrote:! >> Have you updated the firmware?. > E >Yes, Tru64 came with a firmware CD, "show config" now reports: "SRM s& >Console 5.8-1" . Is that the latest ? >t  G No.  The latest CD I have, based on a very brief search, is FW CD V6.2.t  6 According to the doc on that, 7.3 requires FW CD V5.9     O ===============================================================================nN Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738   wayne@tachysoft.com; http://www.tachysoft.com/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html   cO ===============================================================================fH Randolph Duke (in Trading Places): "Mother always said you were greedy."1    Mortimer Duke: "She meant it as a compliment!"p   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 11:23:26 -0600a( From: Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com>( Subject: Re: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX/ Message-ID: <00A2A5BD.2840CC92.3@tachysoft.com>u  ) >From: Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com>e >X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms) >Subject: Re: Problems with 7.3 and 164LXt0 >Message-ID: <00A2A5B6.895015F8.5@tachysoft.com>& >Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:36:03 -0600. >Organization: Info-VAX<==>comp.os.vms Gateway$ >X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List
 >Lines: 25  >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit/ >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"? >MIME-Version: 1.0- >Reply-To: Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com>r >X-Gateway-From: mvb.saic.como >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >        >> >nH >No.  The latest CD I have, based on a very brief search, is FW CD V6.2. >a7 >According to the doc on that, 7.3 requires FW CD V5.9   >e  N Ack, I see from rereading the post that you actually want to install 7.3-1.  I' was going by the title, which says 7.3.Y  J Since 7.3-1 is not mentioned on the 6.2 cd, I assume you will need an even later version of the firmware.   WaynefO ===============================================================================aN Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738   wayne@tachysoft.com; http://www.tachysoft.com/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html   tO ===============================================================================wH Randolph Duke (in Trading Places): "Mother always said you were greedy."1    Mortimer Duke: "She meant it as a compliment!"e   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 18:24:47 +0100h& From: Tor Arne Rein <tarein@online.no>( Subject: Re: Problems with 7.3 and 164LX1 Message-ID: <v31Db.5568$n31.95906@news2.e.nsc.no>    Hi,z     Tor Arne   Wayne Sewell wrote:  >>Tom Linden wrote:  >>! >>>Have you updated the firmware?o >>F >>Yes, Tru64 came with a firmware CD, "show config" now reports: "SRM ' >>Console 5.8-1" . Is that the latest ?  >> >  > I > No.  The latest CD I have, based on a very brief search, is FW CD V6.2.m > 8 > According to the doc on that, 7.3 requires FW CD V5.9  >   H Now I also have found some docs indicating that to run VMS 7.3 you need H firmware 5.9 . The sad thing for me is that I have firmware CD 6.3, and I for 164LX the latest version is still 5.8. No updated firmware have been T  released for 164LX yet it seems.  9 So I have to use VMS 7.2-1 or earlier it seems. Anybody ?a   Tor Arne   ------------------------------  + Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 14:43:52 +0000 (UTC) $ From: helbig@astro.multiNOSPAMvax.de  Subject: question on SMTP queues/ Message-ID: <brhsv7$2428$1@news.xenopsyche.net>e  I There was a thread on this a while back, but I don't recall a definitive   answer.:  H I'm in the process of re-organising my queue database.  Batch and print < queues I understand, but the SMTP queues are a bit puzzling.   Normally, things look like    + Generic server queue TCPIP$SMTP_NODENAME_00VM   /GENERIC=(TCPIP$SMTP_NODE_01) /OWNER=[SYSTEM] /PROTECTION=(S:M,O:D,G:R,W:S)e   /SCHEDULE=(NOSIZE)  N Server queue TCPIP$SMTP_NODENAME_01, idle, on NODENAME::, mounted form DEFAULT?   /BASE_PRIORITY=4 /DEFAULT=(FEED,FORM=DEFAULT) /OWNER=[SYSTEM] >   /PROCESSOR=TCPIP$SMTP_SYMBIONT /PROTECTION=(S:M,O:D,G:R,W:S)   This raises several questions:  E What is the point of a generic queue which points to just ONE server - queue?  2 What is the point of a generic queue on each node?  I Why not have the following setup: there is just one generic server queue g+ which points to server queues on each node?s   ------------------------------  + Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 14:53:34 +0000 (UTC)e$ From: helbig@astro.multiNOSPAMvax.de$ Subject: RE: question on SMTP queues/ Message-ID: <brhthe$248a$1@news.xenopsyche.net>@  J > I'm in the process of re-organising my queue database.  Batch and print > > queues I understand, but the SMTP queues are a bit puzzling. >  > Normally, things look like t > - > Generic server queue TCPIP$SMTP_NODENAME_00oO >   /GENERIC=(TCPIP$SMTP_NODE_01) /OWNER=[SYSTEM] /PROTECTION=(S:M,O:D,G:R,W:S)  >   /SCHEDULE=(NOSIZE) > P > Server queue TCPIP$SMTP_NODENAME_01, idle, on NODENAME::, mounted form DEFAULTA >   /BASE_PRIORITY=4 /DEFAULT=(FEED,FORM=DEFAULT) /OWNER=[SYSTEM]l@ >   /PROCESSOR=TCPIP$SMTP_SYMBIONT /PROTECTION=(S:M,O:D,G:R,W:S)  H A related question.  Some nodes have their own SYS$QUEUE_MANAGER with a F common database (on a non-system disk mounted by all nodes which also I contains SYSUAF.DAT etc) and appropriate logical names and some have the  ? default setup (and run their own SYS$QUEUE_MANAGER.  I want to .= consolidate everything to one queue manager and one database.e  F The easiest way would be to stop the queue manager on the nodes which E have their own, delete the database files, define the logicals, then  H issue a START/QUEUE/MANAGER/CLUSTER on that node (perhaps the last step D isn't necessary).  After that, I can re-create the queues by hand.  I Again, batch and print queues are no problem, but how can one create the  H SMTP queues by hand?  Alternatively, will they be created if they don't 5 exist a) when needed or b) when TCPIP is (re)started?t   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 09:45:05 -0600o( From: Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com>$ Subject: Re: question on SMTP queues/ Message-ID: <00A2A5AF.6AAC1D4C.7@tachysoft.com>D  % >From: helbig@astro.multiNOSPAMvax.der >X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms! >Subject: question on SMTP queues , >Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 14:43:52 +0000 (UTC)! >Organization: none at the moments
 >Lines: 260 >Message-ID: <brhsv7$2428$1@news.xenopsyche.net>) >Reply-To: helbig@astro.multiNOSPAMvax.de  >X-Gateway-From: mvb.saic.como >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >X-Gateway-Source-Info: USENET > J >There was a thread on this a while back, but I don't recall a definitive  >answer. >eI >I'm in the process of re-organising my queue database.  Batch and print  = >queues I understand, but the SMTP queues are a bit puzzling.0 >8 >Normally, things look like  >a, >Generic server queue TCPIP$SMTP_NODENAME_00N >  /GENERIC=(TCPIP$SMTP_NODE_01) /OWNER=[SYSTEM] /PROTECTION=(S:M,O:D,G:R,W:S) >  /SCHEDULE=(NOSIZE)  > O >Server queue TCPIP$SMTP_NODENAME_01, idle, on NODENAME::, mounted form DEFAULTo@ >  /BASE_PRIORITY=4 /DEFAULT=(FEED,FORM=DEFAULT) /OWNER=[SYSTEM]? >  /PROCESSOR=TCPIP$SMTP_SYMBIONT /PROTECTION=(S:M,O:D,G:R,W:S)0 >0 >This raises several questions:f >eF >What is the point of a generic queue which points to just ONE server  >queue?D >33 >What is the point of a generic queue on each node?  > J >Why not have the following setup: there is just one generic server queue , >which points to server queues on each node? >3    J One possibility is to not use batch queues in the first place, i.e. use mxL instead of the smtp in the stack.  Since mx will create as many smtp serversN and outgoing smtp processes as you want on whichever nodes you want, you don'tL have to deal with batch queues at all.  Having no idea how tcpip assigns theO traffic, I would hope that there would not be a separate batch job per message,a but who knows, maybe there is.  I I would do this even with tcpware and multinet, even more so with tcpip. aG Certainly with the old ucx, it was the only way to get functional smtp.   J mx has always provided the capability of having decent smtp, even if using
 tcpip/ucx.   WaynePO ===============================================================================hN Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738   wayne@tachysoft.com; http://www.tachysoft.com/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html   sO =============================================================================== H Randolph Duke (in Trading Places): "Mother always said you were greedy."1    Mortimer Duke: "She meant it as a compliment!"a   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:17:44 GMT-# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> 1 Subject: Re: Singapore Exchange to run on OpenVMSBJ Message-ID: <sa%Cb.16837$%TO.3822@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>   Mike Naime wrote:8. > John Smith <a@nonymous.com> wrote in messageF > news:JeNCb.13065$%TO.8907@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com... >> Mike Naime wrote:0 >>> John Smith <a@nonymous.com> wrote in messageE >>> news:IupCb.2311$NNW1.2263@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...S >>>> Keith Parris wrote:G >>>>> Singapore Exchange (SGX) has chosen exchange software from the OMsE >>>>> Group and will run it on OpenVMS in a disaster-tolerant clusterM8 >>>>> configuration.  This is a new customer to OpenVMS. >>>> > <BIG SNIP> >>G >> Coming back to your healthcare observation - I know about Cerner, etiF >> al. but let's be very clear when you say "Healthcare (Hospitals) isD >> the largest user of VMS systems in the US". I won't dispute that,4 >> but does VMS have the largest market share in theE >> healthcare/hospital space? That's what would be a more interestings >> question to have answered.e >> >rG > I'm not sure about the answer to that.  You would have to poll all ofI1 > the existing hospitals to answer that question.  >eG > England is in the process of automating.  They sent our RFP's about ai > year ago.e+ > http://www.e-health-insider.com/index.cfmc$ > http://msn.vnunet.com/News/1151473( > http://msn.vnunet.com/specials/1139129G > Depending on how contracts go...  It could mean 500+ GS1280's runningy# > the healthcare system in England. > > If this works for England, I'm sure that others will follow.    D Interesting news. So when is your app going to be ported to Swedish,J Norwegian, Spanish, Czech, etc... to serve the national healthcare marketsC in those countries?  Australia and Canada are your only other largenG English-speaking markets with 'national care' systems, and even then ineL Canada the market for apps is determined at the hospital level just as it is( in the USA (don't know about Australia).    J But even your 500 systems and the one sold to the Singapore Exchange isn'tI going to halt the erosion of VMS in the market unless HP begins to marketn and advertise VMS.  ? I'm working on a deal right now that could represent a glorious I advertising/marketing coup for VMS - with perhaps $10MM-15MM in Alpha/VMS_K and related storage & licences. When I speak with the execs (CEO, CFO, COO,nJ CIO) at my customer I find that they have awareness of virtually every o/sL offered by IBM, Sun, NSK, but know nothing of VMS. It's an uphill battle for2 me to pitch VMS for an application that is custom.  I You might say - bring HP in to help out. No f!cking way at this point. HPmB should have been doing what they should have been doing long ago -L advertising to prime the pump. The marketing droids they have hereabouts areH useless, with minimal VMS knowledge and would only screw up my carefully laid efforts thus far.  K My interest is the app more than the o/s. VMS would make the app far easieriB to deliver and more robust and in the long run make the app a moreF satisfactory experience for the entire organization from the operatorsH through to the end users, but I want to get paid so I will deliver it on2 Solaris if I have to in order to get the business.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:11:05 +0100') From: Michael Unger <unger@despammed.com>n& Subject: Re: TCPIP 5.3 VAX on Hobbyist9 Message-ID: <brh9jc$37jv3$1@ID-152801.news.uni-berlin.de>a  * On 2003-12-14 02:47, "Dan O'Reilly" wrote:  G > ...or, you could get a hobbyist license for MultiNet or TCPware, both  > of which have an IMAP server.l >  > [...]d  / A license is worthless without the software ...l  H Are there *hobbyist* distribution kits? I've been told the "official" CD kits were quite expensive.   Michael    -- P; Real names enhance the probability of getting real answers.o@ Please do *not* send "Security Patch Notifications" or "SecurityA Updates"; this system isn't running a Micro$oft operating system.a5 My e-mail account at DECUS Munich is no longer valid.t   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 11:06:13 +0100a* From: Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net>& Subject: Re: TCPIP 5.3 VAX on Hobbyist/ Message-ID: <3FDC4425.A298E05@sture.homeip.net>C   Michael Unger wrote: > , > On 2003-12-14 02:47, "Dan O'Reilly" wrote: > I > > ...or, you could get a hobbyist license for MultiNet or TCPware, bothP! > > of which have an IMAP server.a > >t	 > > [...]s > 1 > A license is worthless without the software ...f > J > Are there *hobbyist* distribution kits? I've been told the "official" CD > kits were quite expensive. >   G I've just checked my email archives. When I registered for the Hobbyistc8 version of MultiNet, Process sent me a download address.  " You can register as a Hobbyist at , http://www.process.com/openvms/hobbyist.html  = IIRC you need your VMS Hobbyist license details handy for the  registration process.    -- e
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 04:54:37 -0500i* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>& Subject: Re: TCPIP 5.3 VAX on Hobbyist) Message-ID: <3FDC332B.DFA6670C@istop.com>    Michael Unger wrote:J > Are there *hobbyist* distribution kits? I've been told the "official" CD > kits were quite expensive.  I It is perfectly legal to obtain a kit from friends if you have a license.e   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:55:04 +0100 ) From: Michael Unger <unger@despammed.com>e& Subject: Re: TCPIP 5.3 VAX on Hobbyist9 Message-ID: <brhjvi$3bmmn$1@ID-152801.news.uni-berlin.de>m  ( On 2003-12-14 11:06, "Paul Sture" wrote:   > Michael Unger wrote: >> - >> [...] >> @K >> Are there *hobbyist* distribution kits? I've been told the "official" CDi >> kits were quite expensive.3 > I > I've just checked my email archives. When I registered for the Hobbyistw: > version of MultiNet, Process sent me a download address.9                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  >  > [...]p  K That's fine -- well, at least with a DSL line, sometimes next year perhaps.s   Michaelt   -- W; Real names enhance the probability of getting real answers.o@ Please do *not* send "Security Patch Notifications" or "SecurityA Updates"; this system isn't running a Micro$oft operating system. 5 My e-mail account at DECUS Munich is no longer valid.v   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 06:47:15 -0700h% From: Dan O'Reilly <dano@process.com>?& Subject: Re: TCPIP 5.3 VAX on HobbyistB Message-ID: <6.0.0.22.2.20031214064510.02028b88@raptor.psccos.com>  , At 02:11 AM 12/14/2003, Michael Unger wrote:+ >On 2003-12-14 02:47, "Dan O'Reilly" wrote:o >iI > > ...or, you could get a hobbyist license for MultiNet or TCPware, both ! > > of which have an IMAP server.. > >P	 > > [...]. >r0 >A license is worthless without the software ... >oI >Are there *hobbyist* distribution kits? I've been told the "official" CD  >kits were quite expensive.t  C Yes, there are.  Go to http://www.process.com/openvms/hobbyist.htmlc for more information.i   ------J +-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+J | Dan O'Reilly                  |  "There are 10 types of people in this |J | Principal Engineer            |   world: those who understand binary   |J | Process Software              |   and those who don't."                |J | http://www.process.com        |                                        |J +-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 16:27:15 GMT 5 From: rdeininger@mindspringdot.com (Robert Deininger)r Subject: Re: Turbochannel SCSIL Message-ID: <rdeininger-1412031129220001@user-105n8ng.dialup.mindspring.com>  > In article <slrnbtnvo0.geb.rivie@Stench.no.domain>, Roger Ivie <rivie@ridgenet.net> wrote:   K >In article <a7SdnTg0NcJxMkaiRVn-vA@comcast.com>, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:-J >> I would be quite surprised if there were a 100Mbit ethernet option for K >> these boxes.  Their heyday was around 1994-95 and I don't think 100Mbit tL >> was out of the laboratory at that point.  Turbochannel was a proprietary F >> dead end!  I don't think anybody but DEC ever used it or developed  >> Turbochannel hardware.  >tH >There were 3rd party TURBOchannel interfaces. Kubota made a system, butA >it may have been simply a re-badged DEC system; I never saw one.h  J True, and TC wasn't particularly proprietary.  DEC published all the specsE and there was an open license for anyone to use TC without royalties.o  J PCI came along and quickly became widely adopted.  PCI wasn't particularlyI better than TC, but it became the "standard" and pushed a number of other 
 busses aside.C   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2003.691 ************************